I think that a rule, 'no first strike' is probably most useful in that without it...it's simply too easy to justify personal aggression; one minute one is 'precluding' a possible violent attack on the street...the next instance could be popping your wife in the mouth for yelling about you being out too late.

Quote: one minute one is 'precluding' a possible violent attack on the street...the next instance could be popping your wife in the mouth for yelling about you being out too late.

I’m sorry but that isn’t even a logical progression. One is a violent attack and the other is an argument. Unless there is a history of violence of the wife on the husband there should be no need for a pre-emptive strike. Even if there is a history, one does not go straight to violence. Using Leo’s progression levels of self defense from a current thread:

Who said violence was (always) logical? You missed the operative word 'could' (situational). I'm sorry...but having known violent people in my life, while it may not seem logical to you, I'm alluding to the fact that certain temperaments will rationalize violence, trying to dance around 'when it's okay' to 'react' first.

Sorry folks...but hitting first is wrong. It may be reasonable...but is wrong and has it's consequences.

An attack doesn't start when the first strike is thrown, it starts many steps before that. If you have an honest believe that you are in danger, then you are legally and morally permitted to respond preemptively.

There are alternatives to the preemptive strategy, for sure there are are other ways, but it has been proven again and again that the person who hits first is the one more likely to eat at home.

We are talking self defence here not some dojo sparing session. I have over 20 years of TMA and RBSD behind me. I've been there and know the difference. It is not dishonest to pre-empt infact a preemptive strike often equates to a lower overall quantity of violence so you could say it is more honourable.

A lot of the the things ( advice etc) that I heard on the forum seem to be Martial arts related as opposed to self defence related.

Get in touch with reality guys, take a holistic view of a self defence situation, don't just concentrate on the techniques. for eg a head lock was introduce as a scenario in another thread, well how the hell did you get into that situation in the first place, I guarantee there was at least 3 occasions that you could have defended before the Headlock.

Sorry Guys I don't mean to come across as lecturing or talking down to you, and I love Traditional Martial Arts (TMA) I would not trad 2 decades of study of it for anyone. or anything ( except my wife , But thats obvious.. Hey I'm in love and proud of it )..... where was i ... oh yeah... but real life street attacks are not the same as in the Dojo it requires a different approach, mindset, you have fear involved at a plethora of other factors most of which are unpredictable. I am one of the pro TMA guys maybe I had been lucky my I found my TMA very helpful when on the door, but it was modified or stratified. Personally i find TMA and RBSD to compliment each other very well.It's like men and women they go well to together but lets be honest they ARE different ( no offense intended to the gay dudes and dudetts, it's just not my thing)

Any way Someone's bound to get [censored] of at me for this but the only true constant in the universe is .....TRUTH. this is just what i've discovered to be true

Quote:I think that a rule, 'no first strike' is probably most useful in that without it...it's simply too easy to justify personal aggression; one minute one is 'precluding' a possible violent attack on the street...the next instance could be popping your wife in the mouth for yelling about you being out too late.

i dont follow this thought process at all Harlan, sorry. Accurately assessing a threat to your person and taking steps to prevent it, and attacking someone for disagreeing with you are completely different motivations.

I have pre-empted on many occasions, and dont have a problem with it. intrestingly enough, much of my pre-emption/ escalation has had to do with preventing or intervening to stop women being attacked by aggressive partners.

“...the next instance could be popping your wife in the mouth for yelling about you being out too late.”

Nothing wrong with an appropriate level of domestic discipline. Vital that she knows her place…

Cord, Stopping a woman{person} being attacked, isn’t really a pre-emptive strike, violence is already in progress, giving the guy a blind side right hand to the jaw, is more like sniping, and a very joyous thing to do it is….

I think some people, have interpreted a pre-emptive strike to prevent the other person getting a shot at you first, into Smacking some poor innocent if they so much as look at you..

All the times I have been in “no mans land” at work with some [censored] twat squaring up to me, any second he is going to try to hit me, all my conflict resolution isn’t working, I can feel my bottle slipping….. the legs going, butterfly’s, voice cracks, heart racing……… the guys just gets that little too close , or shows me a tell tale, or does his 3 look target acquisition….. I KNOW HE IS ABOUT TO HIT ME…. So bang right hand to the side of the jaw….moving into catch/restrain him……

Maybe if he isn’t that big, a double hip punch to the solar. Not always going to put him down, but he is going to move back

Wow as I type I really miss working on the doors etc……. OMG!!! That’s very dumb

Wife beating is a definite no-no. Pre-emptive strikes are only for situations where imminent threat of serious violence is present and all other methods of self defense have failed. Ideally, no situation would get through so many layers of self defense but in reality it happens on rare occasions.

The fundamental principle is to be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a pre-emptive strike was self defense, both to a court and to yourself. This can only happen if there was no other way to resolve the situation.

Quote: If they want ot attack me, they agree to accept the injuries they will sustain.

How do manage to get them to accept that? Do you force them to sign some sort of waiver or something? "I hereby agree to let you whup my butt and fully accept sole liability for any injuries sustained during said whupping!". What a cool idea... could you send me a copy of the waiver!

Oooh very funny Gavin! I'm sayin if they attack me, they automatically accept the consequences, they jsut dont know what they are.

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,